##PAGE1##

NEUTRAL CITATION

C/SCA/9642/2017 JUDGMENT DATED: 05/02/2026

0.7787830706576712

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 9642 of 2017

FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:

HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MAULIK J.SHELAT

=============================================

Approved for Reporting Yes No

√

=============================================

GIRISHBHAI CHHELSHANKAR BHATT

Versus

STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.

=============================================

Appearance:

MR GUNVANT R THAKAR(3801) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1

MS NIDHI VYAS, AGP for the Respondent(s) No. 1,2,3,4

=============================================

CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MAULIK J.SHELAT

Date : 05/02/2026

ORAL JUDGMENT

1. Heard Mr. Gunvant R. Thakar, learned advocate for the

petitioner and Ms.Nidhi Vyas, learned AGP for the respondent

State. With the consent of the learned advocates for the

parties, the matter is taken up for hearing.

2. The present petition is filed under Article 226 of the

Constitution of India, seeking the following reliefs :

“(a) allow this petition with cost; and / or

(b) quash and set aside the orders dated 30/06/2015 and

05/11/2015 (Annexure-A Colly.) issued by respondent no.3 ; and / or

(c) hold and declare that procedure of departmental inquiry is

vitiated on the ground of delay of more than 32 years; and / or

Page 1 of 12

Uploaded by GAURAV J THAKER(HC00951) on Fri Feb 06 2026 Downloaded on : Wed Apr 01 04:29:20 IST 2026

NEUTRAL CITATION

C/SCA/9642/2017 JUDGMENT DATED: 05/02/2026

0.7787830706576712

(d) hold and declare that petitioner is entitled to all the retiral

benefits in accordance with law as if order dated 30/06/2015 and

order dated 05/11/2015 are never issued against the petitioner

declaring such orders as non-est ; and / or

(e) direct respondent authorities to pay all the retiral benefits with 9

% interest till the actual date of payment ; and / or

(f) pending admission and final hearing of this petition direct

respondent authorities to pay provisional pension to the petitioner

forthwith as per the provisions of Rule 145 of the Gujarat Civil

Services (Pension) Rules, 2002 ; and / or”

BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE :

3. The short controversy involved in the matter is that the

petitioner was appointed to the post of Peon on 24/12/1982

and suspended on the date of his retirement, i.e., 30/06/2015,

that too after office hours, on the ground that his date of birth

as per the Gujarat Secondary and Higher Secondary

Education Board, Vadodara (hereinafter referred to as “the

Board”), is 02/06/1957 instead of 02/06/1959, as declared by

him. The impugned order dated 30/06/2015, whereby the

petitioner was suspended, a close look of that order would

indicate that he was ordered to be suspended after office

hours on 30/06/2015. Prima facie, the said order could not

have been passed against the petitioner as, after office hours

on 30/06/2015, he retired from service.

3.1 Having come to know about such a defect in the order

and to come out from such defect, it appears that the

respondent vide its impugned order dated 05/11/2015 issued

an amended order whereby, instead of suspension, an order of

relieving the petitioner from service was issued.

Page 2 of 12

Uploaded by GAURAV J THAKER(HC00951) on Fri Feb 06 2026 Downloaded on : Wed Apr 01 04:29:20 IST 2026

NEUTRAL CITATION

C/SCA/9642/2017 JUDGMENT DATED: 05/02/2026

0.7787830706576712

3.2 Both the impugned orders are challenged by the

petitioner in this petition. This Court would like to go further

in the matter but, at the outset, states that the impugned

order dated 30/06/2015 is not sustainable in law, inasmuch as

the petitioner could not have been suspended after office

hours on 30/06/2015 as, by that time, he would retire from

service having reached the age of superannuation, i.e.,

30.06.2015. Likewise, the amended order dated 05/11/2015

impugned in this petition whereby the petitioner was relieved

from service is also not sustainable for the simple reason that,

by that time, the petitioner was already superannuated from

service, a